GOP senators unanimously vote against seeing evidence

[hislegacy]

Question: The House, just like the Senate, has time, funding and power to go to the courts and get the subpoenas, why didn’t they?

Has there ever been an explanation?

 

[GACfan]

So let him testify! Sadly, Donald Trump has been caught in a great many untruths. Granted some are out of his ignorance and poor education but a great many are indeed outright lies. As a narcissist he will lie to make himself look good --- he hardly even knows he's doing it.

If we were bet on how long it would take Trump to perjure himself while under oath, then I wager he would within ten minutes or less. I honestly don't think he could help himself given his pride and ego.

 

[blackribbon]

We do not live in a country where trials start with the assumption of guilt and then the accused has to prove that he/she is innocent.

And "why" ... because it sets a precedent that would weaken all the presidencies in the future. Again, innocent until proven guilty without a doubt. And I don't want a weak President who has to get permission from Congress on everything he/she does. I prefer the separation of the branches of government as designed by our Founding Fathers.

 

[whatbogsends]

Was it not the job of the House to gather this info?

They knew before they impeached that the president has executive privilege to do what he did.

But they chose to do it anyway for spite.

Let's see, is there an election coming up soon that this all could place the president in doubt? Sure there is, but they are not fooling anyone but a few who choose to believe their lie.

There is an upcoming election. Specifically, there's an upcoming election in which Trump is trying to leverage his powers as President to coerce foreign governments to influence our election. That is an abuse of power, and directly impacts our election.

The only one's believing lies are those who continue to defend Trump against the overwhelming evidence of his corrupt actions.

 

[whatbogsends]

Then the Democratic House should have had the spine to pursue that in court; they didn't. Guess they figured they could force the Senate to do their work for them....they couldn't......tsk, tsk....

As we saw with Mueller and them forcing McGahn to testify, Trump's tactics are to delay, delay, delay (just as he did in his business dealings, when he stiffed his contractors and "beat" them in court by dragging it out and making the legal costs pile up). Had the Democrats waited for the courts to decide, they would be letting Trump abuse his powers as President to influence the upcoming election.

The only tsk, tsk is for the Senators failing to fulfill their oaths related to the impeachment proceedings.

 

[whatbogsends]

Hey, I voted for Trump in '16 and will again in '20.

But there are many things about his character that upsets me.

For example, I was watching the news the other day and my grand kids came over, 7 and 9. All of a sudden I hear Trump on the tv say s.o.b. loud and clear.

My grand kids looked at me and felt like crawling under the couch.

It burned me up to no end. There is no call for a president to conduct himself in such a manner. I agree with many of your complaints of Trump.

But as far as following his legal rights, I can't blame him.

Your continued support of a corrupt President is noted.

For most Presidents, language like Trump uses would be a legitimate concern. For Trump, his language is the least of what we should be concerned about.

 

[Charlie24]

There is an upcoming election. Specifically, there's an upcoming election in which Trump is trying to leverage his powers as President to coerce foreign governments to influence our election. That is an abuse of power, and directly impacts our election.

The only one's believing lies are those who continue to defend Trump against the overwhelming evidence of his corrupt actions.

Man you need to call Schumer right away, he desperately needs the evidence you are holding.

 

[Charlie24]

Your continued support of a corrupt President is noted.

For most Presidents, language like Trump uses would be a legitimate concern. For Trump, his language is the least of what we should be concerned about.

Yep, you can put me down officially as a Trumper in November.

 

[Allandavid]

Yep, you can put me down officially as a Trumper in November.

You have my sympathy...

 

[wing2000]

No, the House did not request the documents properly and would not allow the President to have his counsel present.

not properly?

The rules are there for a reason. They knew the rules and didn't do what they needed to do to see the documents.

What rules? The House, like the Senate, can make it's own rules.

They voted without them saying that they didn't need them because they had overwhelming evidence to show that Trump should be impeached. If they had overwhelming evidence, then the Senate must not need it either.

The evidence would obviously been even stronger with the documents the POTUS has blocked entirely.

And there have been exactly TWO other presidential trials for impeachment. Not a single president has been convicted though.

...and?

This Senate could have voted to address additional evidence. They chose to not address it at this time...hence, they tabled it. Tabling things is a normal part of how the House and Senate does business.

Right, the Senate had the choice to subpoena witnesses. They chose not to.

Again, the evidence should have been gathered and presented in the House before they voted to impeach the president. Any additional witnesses should be because the Senate has questions and wants to call the witnesses...not because the House is telling them who they should call.

The Senate can subpoena witnesses and documents at any time. It they chose not to over the next few days, every Republican Senator will have to explain to the voters in November why they were afraid to review evidence relevant to this case.

In the meantime, Sanders, Warren, and Biden can't be campaigning as we go into the presidental primaries in Feb as long as this trial continues.

I could care less.

 

[rjs330]

HEre's a fun test: let's imagine a future when PRESIDENT OCASIO-CORTEZ WITHHOLDS FUNDS TO ISRAEL. I bet the GOP would turn over every rock on earth to get evidence and would scream their lungs bloody if they were denied witnesses and evidence.

Yes they would. So why didn't the Democrats? All this evidence sitting out there and they didn't get any of it? It was their job! And they failed. Their job was to present all the evidence to the Senate. Why didn't they? The houses investigation was a sham, they don't have the evidence.

 

[Arcangl86]

Yes they would. So why didn't the Democrats? All this evidence sitting out there and they didn't get any of it? It was their job! And they failed. Their job was to present all the evidence to the Senate. Why didn't they? The houses investigation was a sham, they don't have the evidence.

They didn't because Trump refused to turn it over, and that was why he was impeached. Congress has the inherent power to issue subpoenas. It's not up to the President to decide if he wants to obey them or not.

 

[rjs330]

not properly?


What rules? The House, like the Senate, can make it's own rules.



The evidence would obviously been even stronger with the documents the POTUS has blocked entirely.



...and?



Right, the Senate had the choice to subpoena witnesses. They chose not to.



The Senate can subpoena witnesses and documents at any time. It they chose not to over the next few days, every Republican Senator will have to explain to the voters in November why they were afraid to review evidence relevant to this case.



I could care less.

If the house can make its own rules and did, then why all the whining about the Senate doing the same? It's okay for the house, but not for the Senate? Why didn't the house do their job and gather all the evidence of there is any? So they can whine when the Senate doesn't so it either?

 

[Arcangl86]

If the house can make its own rules and did, then why all the whining about the Senate doing the same? It's okay for the house, but not for the Senate? Why didn't the house do their job and gather all the evidence of there is any? So they can whine when the Senate doesn't so it either?

The House tried to, and President refused to turn it over. The Senate isn't even attempting to get it.

 

[rjs330]

They didn't because Trump refused to turn it over, and that was why he was impeached. Congress has the inherent power to issue subpoenas. It's not up to the President to decide if he wants to obey them or not.

Then why didn't they wait for the court cases to be handled so they could force him to turn everything over they subpoenaed? Like I said they didn't do their job. Instead of rushing and taking shortcuts they could have done it right. Instead they did it poorly, didn't investigate properly and now they want the Senate to do the job they should have done in the first place. Makes me wonder why.

 

[variant]

The House tried to, and President refused to turn it over. The Senate isn't even attempting to get it.

Right because if they did he would refuse to turn them over and then they would then have to vote that he wasn't obstructing congress.

One party is voting to nullify the investigation, impeachment and oversight power of congress on presidents of their own party.

 

[rjs330]

The House tried to, and President refused to turn it over. The Senate isn't even attempting to get it.

Did the house really try for all the things they now want the Senate to do? I don't think so.

Secondly, even if the Senate did, whats to stop the president from refusing again?

No if the House really wanted all the things they now want the Senate to get, then they should have gone through the process to get it.

 

[Arcangl86]

Then why didn't they wait for the court cases to be handled so they could force him to turn everything over they subpoenaed? Like I said they didn't do their job. Instead of rushing and taking shortcuts they could have done it right. Instead they did it poorly, didn't investigate properly and now they want the Senate to do the job they should have done in the first place. Makes me wonder why.

Because they have the inherent power to issue subpoenas. If they went to the courts, they probably would have just declared it a political question and teh House would have been where they started.

 

[variant]

Did the house really try for all the things they now want the Senate to do? I don't think so.

Yes actually.

Secondly, even if the Senate did, whats to stop the president from refusing again?

Nothing except a protracted court battle. That's why they impeached him for obstruction of congress.

No if the House really wanted all the things they now want the Senate to get, then they should have gone through the process to get it.

If the courts are used to make it a protracted battle then it nullifys the congresses ability to remove the president for trying to tamper with an upcoming election.

This isn't how this system is supposed to work. Political parties shouldn't be allowed to vote out powers of the Constitution when they find they have enough power.

 

[variant]

Because they have the inherent power to issue subpoenas. If they went to the courts, they probably would have just declared it a political question and teh House would have been where they started.

If the courts declare subpoenas merely a "political question" and not a power of congress then congress has no means to act as oversight to the presidency.

Remember that for the next election, because we will be electing our next king.